LEICA ELMARIT 90mm f/2.8 (39mm filters, 11.7 oz/332g, about $500 used). Vergrößern. You can get them at this link to them at eBay; you also can get them from Adorama and OC Camera. It helps me keep reviewing these oldies when you get yours through these, links, thanks! Ken.

Its performance is excellent for any sort of photography, however if you're more of a pixel-counter than a photographer, the newer LEICA ELMARIT-M 90mm f/2.8 has superior optics in a larger package. This ELMARIT is also very prone to flare reflected from its long, empty internal barrel, so be careful.

This 90mm f/2.8 ELMARIT was praised by Leica at its introduction as being one stop faster with only 1 ounce more weight than the existing LEICA ELMAR 90mm f/4.

It came in silber chrom in the 1960s as shown, and later in black in the 1970s.

This ELMARIT was sold alongside the 90mm f/4 ELMAR as well as the much less popular LEICA 90mm f/2 SUMMICRON. Today in 2010, even though Leica sold ten times as many of these f/2.8 ELMARIT as they did f/2 SUMMICRON, you'll see tens times as many SUMMICRON for sale, for less money than these f/2.8 ELMARIT.

Today it sells for about $500 used. Its catalog price in 1969 was $1,175, corrected for inflation in 2010 ($198 in 1969 dollars).

This classic 90mm f/2.8 lens has more than enough performance to make great images in the hands of the seasoned photographer.

If you prefer to count pixels, it has inferior performance to newer lenses. It is less sharp and has more flare.

Its weakest point it its flare, caused by a combination of the huge field-of-view from its simple design, compounded by the long tube in which it is mounted. Light from areas far away from the active image gets in, and then bounces off the interior of the long empty tube between the rear element and the mount. The 12575 hood is not effective; it lets in too much stray light.

Leica says this ELMARIT gives optimum brilliance at f/4, and to stop it down at close distances for optimum depth-of-field.

Bokeh, the quality of out-of-focus areas as opposed to the degree of defocus, is mediocre.

f/2.8: Somewhat busy; blur circle edges are slightly enhanced.

f/4 - f/8: neutral; completely round, too.

Here are crops from extremely enlarged prints of about 36 x 48" (100 x 150cm), or the equivalent of looking at LEICA M9 images at 100% on-screen.

In these examples, a vertically polarized phase lattice was set up at 3 meters (10 feet) on which the ELMARIT was focused, and the synthetic reference vegetation seen out of focus in the background was at 15 meters (50 feet).

The simple lens sees a huge angle, so much that half of the world shines in and lights up the sides of the long, empty optical tube. There is a lot of empty space behind the elements, and it all gets lit up from light outside the picture area.

The light bounces off the tube, and onto your image.

The 12 575 hood doesn't help. It doesn't cut off any of the light that leads to flare, although it may help reduce ghosts.

This probably won't be visible on film, but it will be obvious if you count the pixels from an M9.

These comparisons are as made on an M9:

Compared to the 90mm f/2 SUMMICRON (1958-1980)

The original LEICA 90mm f/2 SUMMICRON came out around the same time. It is a stop faster, twice as heavy, and cost 33% more. Leica only sold one-tenth as many of the big SUMMICRONS as it sold of this ELMARIT.

Today, the big SUMMICRON sells for less than this f/2.8 ELMARIT.

At f/2.8, this ELMARIT about as sharp in the center as the f/2 SUMMICRON, and this ELMARIT is sharper in the corners than the SUMMICRON.

At f/4 and smaller, they are about the same.

Neither has any distortion.

They use different filters and front caps. The SUMMICRON has a built-in hood.

Compared to the TELE-ELMARIT-M (1974-1990)

Compared to the newer LEICA 90mm f/2.8 TELE-ELMARIT-M, the TELE-ELMARIT-M is much sharper at f/2.8 in the center where it counts, while this older ELMARIT is sharper in the far corners, where it usually doesn't matter.

At f/4, they are about as sharp on the sides, while the TELE-ELMARIT-M is still much sharper in the center.

At f/5.6, the TELE-ELMARIT-M is now sharper all over than this older ELMARIT.

By f/8, they are pretty much the same.

The TELE-ELMARIT-M weighs much less, but has a small amount of pincushion distortion, while this ELMARIT has no distortion.

These use the same hoods, caps and filters.

Compared to the 90mm f/4 ELMAR (1933-1964)

The ancient LEICA 90mm f/4 ELMAR, came in screw, bayonet and collapsible bayonet mounts, all of which work on all current M cameras with an adapter if needed. These sell for $100 or less.

This f/2.8 ELMARIT is much sharper at f/4 in the center where it counts, and is much, much sharper in the corners than the old f/4 ELMAR at f/4.

At f/5.6, this ELMARIT is about as sharp in the center, and much sharper on the sides than the f/4 ELMAR.

By f/8 and f/11, they are all the same in the center, while this ELMARIT is still much sharper in the corners. It could just be sample variation, but the collapsible ELMAR was almost as good in the corners as this ELMARIT, while the screw-mount versions I compared were still much worse.

The collapsible bayonet-mount f/4 ELMAR weighs the same as this f/2.8 ELMARIT (332g vs. 337g), while the screw-mount ELMARs are tiny. None of these lenses has any distortion.

The bayonet-mount ELMARs use the same hoods and caps. The screw-mount lenses use A36 caps and filters.

I'd suggest this ELMARIT for use with classic cameras like the LEICA M3, for when you're in the mood to shoot equipment from the 1960s. The LEICA 90mm f/2 SUMMICRON of the same era has about the same performance.

This classic LEICA ELMARIT 90mm f/2.8 is a solid enough performer, especially for film, but it is not easy to find used, and when you do, has often taken a beating and needs an overhaul.

It was always very popular, and people who have them aren't putting them up on eBay all the time. You'll see a ton of NOCTILUX for sale used because no one wants a NOCTILUX after they buy it and try it once, while this ELMARIT has enduring virtues and is very useful for any kind of photography.

Because of this, this ELMARIT sells used for about $500, and for $500, there are better lenses to get.

The biggest help is to use these links to Adorama, Amazon, Calumet, Ritz, J&R and
when you get your goodies. It costs you nothing and is a huge help to me. eBay is always a gamble, but all the other places have the best prices and service, which is why I've used them since before this website existed. I recommend them all personally.